People

Services

Industries

Firm

About

Knowledge

Careers

News

Events

Contact

Connect

Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Accessibility

Payments

Legal

Calgary

Toronto

Edmonton

Ottawa

Vancouver

New York

Montréal

Gannon Beaulne

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner

Thomas Feore

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate

This article explores how courts continue to apply and refine the &ldquo;some basis in fact&rdquo; test for certifying common issues in class actions. Recent decisions illustrate that while expert evidence is not always required, plaintiffs must provide sufficient admissible evidence to support both the existence of common issues and their class-wide resolution. The rulings reinforce certification as a meaningful screening tool and provide guidance on evidentiary expectations going forward.

Some Basis in Fact for the Common Issues

Courts Continue to Apply and Refine the Test

Kristopher R. Hanc

M&A and Capital Markets Lawyer

John Lawless

Corporate & Securities Lawyer | Private Equity

James D. Beeby

Corporate Finance, M&A, Private Equity and Venture Capital Lawyer

<p>The Supreme Court of Canada has released its much-anticipated decision in Lundin Mining Corp. v. Markowich, 2025 SCC 39, clarifying the definition of a "material change" under securities law and providing guidance on when a public company must disclose information to the market. The decision will have broad implications for public companies, their directors, officers, shareholders and other market participants.</p>

Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Scope of Securities Disclosure Obligations for Material Changes

Shifting Grounds: Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Scope of Securities Disclosure Obligations for "Material Changes"

Robert W. Staley

Securities & Commercial Litigation Lawyer | Shareholder Disputes

Vice Chair and Partner

Amanda C. McLachlan

Corporate & Regulatory Lawyer | Disputes, Investigations & Compliance

Doug Fenton

The Ontario Court of Appeal&rsquo;s decision in <em>Binance v. OSC</em> clarifies the limits of the OSC&rsquo;s investigative powers and the Charter protections available in securities investigations. While the Court rejected a constitutional right to challenge a summons before compliance, it found the summons issued to Binance overbroad and unconstitutional. The ruling offers important guidance for market participants on regulatory scrutiny, the scope of document production, and the viability of judicial review.

Court of Appeal Addresses Scope of Charter Review in Securities Investigations

Binance v. OSC: Court of Appeal Addresses Scope of Charter Review in Securities Investigations 

Maisah Syed

The Court of Appeal for Ontario has certified a class action against the manufacturer of a stolen handgun used to carry out the 2018 mass shooting on Danforth Avenue in Toronto, reversing in part the motion judge’s decision below.

Court of Appeal Certifies Negligence Claim Against Gun Manufacturer for Mass Shooting

Christine Plante

Employment Lawyer | HR Legal Counsel

Sara G. Parchello

Employment Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Tami Oguntona

Articling Student at Bennett Jones in Calgary 

Articling Student 

Bill C-31 proposes significant amendments to the Canada Labour Code that would prohibit most post-employment non-compete clauses and potentially other employment-related restrictions in federally regulated workplaces. While the legislation has not yet been enacted, employers should begin assessing the potential impact of the proposed changes, including the limited exemptions available for certain business transactions and senior executive roles.

Restricting Covenants in Federal Workplaces

Proposed Updates to Canada Labour Code Expected To Prohibit Post-Employment Restrictive Covenants

Ruth E. Promislow

Privacy, Cybersecurity & AI Lawyer

Caroline Poirier

IT, Privacy & Data Protection Lawyer

Suzie Suliman

Commercial Transactions Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate, Trademark Agent

The 2025 GPEN Sweep highlights growing global scrutiny of how digital platforms handle children&rsquo;s personal information, revealing increased data collection alongside limited safeguards. While improvements have been made in areas such as account deletion, significant gaps remain in effective age assurance, transparency, and protective design. The findings signal that regulators are likely to intensify guidance and enforcement efforts to better protect children&rsquo;s privacy online.

Global Privacy Sweep Highlights Growing Expectations for Childrens Privacy Online

Global Privacy Sweep Highlights Growing Expectations for Children's Privacy Online

Nina Butz

Jackson Spencer

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Vancouver

This article highlights recent decisions demonstrating courts&rsquo; strict approach to certifying privacy class actions in Canada. It shows how failures to establish an identifiable class, viable claims, or compensable harm can be fatal at certification. The rulings reaffirm courts&rsquo; gatekeeping role and signal continued challenges for plaintiffs advancing privacy-based claims.

Courts show Continued Commitment to Closely Scrutinizing Proposed Privacy Class Actions

Recent Decisions Reinforce Certification Challenges

Courts Continue Close Scrutiny of Privacy Class Actions

Emrys Davis

Competition & Antitrust Litigation Lawyer

Ana Nizharadze

This article examines the growing wave of drip pricing class actions following recent amendments to the Competition Act. It analyzes key Federal Court decisions that clarify how courts assess &ldquo;unattainable prices,&rdquo; fixed and obligatory fees, and damages at the certification stage. With several appeals and new cases underway, these rulings offer early guidance on how disclosure obligations may evolve in 2026 and beyond.

From First Price to Final Cost Drip Pricing Cases on the Rise

"Drip Pricing" Cases on the Rise

From First Price to Final Cost

Lukas VanDusen

Competition & Antitrust Lawyer | Foreign Investment

This article reviews the Competition Tribunal&rsquo;s first decision interpreting the new public interest standing provisions under the Competition Act. It establishes a three-part test for leave and emphasizes the need for a strong evidentiary record, including a viable litigation plan and demonstrated capacity to pursue complex claims. The decision underscores the Tribunal&rsquo;s gatekeeping role while providing guidance for future applicants and respondents.

Benchmark 40 & Under Hot List Honours Four Bennett Jones Lawyers

From the Same Authors